Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A common and agreed upon standard definition of news. This is inherently political. > A common and agreed upon standard definition of journalism / journalist. This is also political. > Transparency and full disclosure about what is news (objective) and what is op-ed (subjective). This is also political. Ultimately, accepting that news is political and rejecting the idea of objective or unbiased reporting is the onl…
Agreeing that relevance and importance are important isn't political. Nor is journalism. Nor is transparency. We can't make everything "political" simply because we lack the will and wherewithal to approach it otherwise. The willingness to give "political" that much importance is simply another symptom of the problem. We're lower expectations i instead of raising them. We're rasing to the bottom, for what? To look "p…
Journalism may not be politics, but reporting on how politics affects people (and even other nations) is journalism's highest purpose. But it's impossible to completely "cover" all aspects of all politics and be 100% unbiased. Therefore, the most important part of journalism is inherently political.
Facing that reality, we can view journalism with a cautious eye. This is critically important for all journalism, actually, as stories are constantly published that mis-state problems, inaccurately describe complex issues, or just blatantly disregard an important detail of a story. These micro-occlusions of information add up to a twisted view of reality for the reader. I think politics is just one of the many ways we should seek to accept and understand the bias in the news.